for all you grudger out there: acceppt it, its a great, good looking camera, unfortunately not branded with CANON.

I'm a Nikon user too, and many folks around here know I have no love for Canon (nor any other brand). They are manufacturers of tools and I am the customer and the user of those tools, that's all as far as I am concerned.

This camera had all the chances to be a successor to the adored D700. It failed in one thing: the AF system. You can't put in a 3000 USD camera the same AF module as the D5300. You can't have the cheapest prime as a kit lens. You can't say "no distractions" while asking people to buy a wi-fi module, a gps module, etc etc.

Also, as far as the sensor is concerned: the D4 has less MP because is a photojournalists' camera and they don't care about high MP count as much as high fps. I have no knowledge that the D4 sensor offers any better IQ or is more expensive to produce - actually I would say the opposite. If someone is more informed in this sense please let me know. I have to say, I would have liked the 24 MP sensor much much better.

It's yet another example of a camera that was close to be fantastic, yet is not, and you wonder what made Nikon overlook such fundamental aspects. The camera ends up feeling like a fashion accessory for loaded vintage-loving hipsters and nostalgics. That is, more a marketing novelty than a photographic one.

_

really the AF of the 5300 that´s a little embarrassing.at least something that´s no good...

and yes, if I would like to have such a camera, i would prefer the 24MP sensor(d3x) too.but in low light it will be unbeatable.

It's yet another example of a camera that was close to be fantastic, yet is not, and you wonder what made Nikon overlook such fundamental aspects. The camera ends up feeling like a fashion accessory for loaded vintage-loving hipsters and nostalgics. That is, more a marketing novelty than a photographic one.

+1

exactly what I think.

And hey, for 3000$ you also get a specialy designed 50mm f1.8 lens (this is like getting a plastic toy with a happy meal...). This is not a great camera from the technologigal point of view, it is just a great camera marketing wise; small FF with retro style, this is hip at the moment, and there are enough people with $ out there who like to be a photojournalist and buy this camera for 3000$.

This DF turned out to be sexy but priced a little bit higher than expected. It got what a still camera should really be but Canon can really have a better camera by just making 6D's look a little bit retro and improving its AF. Just let all points to be double-cross type and EV -3 sensitive and it'll be more joy to use. I have no problem with 6D's current sensor for stills though a little bit of improvement especially in low ISOs won't hurt.

I think that amoung the trendy pro / semi pro wedding photography shooters...this new Nikon will go down a storm. It looks great...it seperates a cosmetic "arty real shooter" from the masses (guests with pop up flash cameras and f5.6 lenses). It looks cool and I have to say Quodos to Nikon for that...yes I'd love a retro DSLR like that from Canon. It's lower MP and higher native ISO ability is a serious consideration for that large niche too. Canon have made the best Wedding camera ever, the 5DIII (developed by one fo the world's leading Wedding photograpehrs - Jeff Ascough). Its features are honed for that market and it's a fantastically versatile camera as a result. Nikon's approach is quite cleaver....same market (and one which they pretty much abandoned after the D7000) but appeal to the look and feel of a trad user. Priced directly against the 5DIII and a complete contrast to Canon's offerings. I think it'll sell really well.

On a personal note, I have always prefered the look and feel of dedicated dials over a menu driven UI. That said, I've made the latter work for me over the last 15 years or so....

On a personal note, I have always prefered the look and feel of dedicated dials over a menu driven UI. That said, I've made the latter work for me over the last 15 years or so....

Really depends on shooting style. 7 dedicated dials "for everything" cluttered over a camera ... are "usable" but not great, when all the shooting situations ever encountered are exactly like what the guy in the Df teasers does: * casually look at STATIC scene only* look at camera ... not at the scene * twist all requisite wheels ... and don't forget to unlock them before every turn* look through viewfinder, frame your shot * take shot ... stretching finger uncomfortably up high to reach shutter release Any other shooting situation = a lot of lost shots. For people with normally developed dexterity it is not easily possible to hold camera plus possibly heavy lens, look through viewfinder and rotate up to 7 locked dials, requiring right and left hand. Would you really want to try that while shooting a wedding? Your kids playing? Your dog running? A really interesting street scene happening this very moment - and only NOW! - before your eyes?

With a good, current UI - like the one found on every Canon EOS DSLR with 2 wheels [=better than a rebel] and only a few buttons, all accessible with only the right hand, it is not necessary to use the menu system at all or to look at the camera, unless one wants to. * see any scene - including fast moving action* take camera to the eye, look through viewfinder* quickly set all shooting paramters with right hand only - using front wheel/thumb wheel/very few buttons, all very intuitive and easy to memorize, all relevant settings visible in viewfinder * take shot

Nikon's current DSLR UI is already more "retro" than Canon's. And it works very well too, but requires more practice/routine to really master it. Most recent tweaks were not for the better [AF-mode selection]. The pseudo-"retro" UI on the Df is a disaster. Luckily it will bite only the pseudo hipsters buying it. :-)

I've tried it at the Paris photo show.I've learnt the "photo" on Nikon F ; Nikon F2 ; Nikon FM ; Nikon FE. I currently shoot Canon (of course....) and Leica. You actually control the speed of a Leica with a wheel. With the DF in my hands i felt "home sweet home". These movements are for me more than natural. Get the camera, frame your shot, adjust exposure with your index finger if needed and press the shutter once the speed is the good one. It only require a few time, it is in fact really fast.That's definitely not a 1Dx alike or a 5D3-hostile as I've read on this forum. These first two cameras are designed for speed with a beast of an AF and give you a total fast control on all of your exposure-data (ISO ; f/ ; speed). You can, as a matter of fact, alternate between strong backlight, very bright and really dark contexts in a very few moments. That's what you must have when you're a photojournalist working on lot of celebs entering and leaving a restaurant at noon on a sunny day. But when photographing family events and any regular situation without drastic exposure variations and whithout fast moving subjects, you don't need that speed-abilities. That's why Canon sells the 6D so well. And I don't know the Nikon-line but I think that the brand new DF is suited for that kind of events.

Once your aperture is set to define your "atmosphere" (f/1,x for shallow DOF ; f/4 for focus assurance ; f/5,6-f/8-and-more for everything in focus), the ISO adjusted, changing the speed is fast IF needed. You don't change your ISO that often. I find that's a great mistake not to offer an aperture ring on the dedicated-50mm. It would have been an extraordinary combo if only....Moreover i consider it is extremely over-priced. People paying 3000€ for a camera usually don't pay a lot of attention to the look of the camera. They want performances, reliability and great UI. (1) Professionals don't wanna look fancy, that's for a lot of them, a nightmare : fancy is not related to serious in most people's mind. When people hire a photographer for corporate events for their company they want him to "look pro". They are paying, and they often pay a lot of money, they don't want him to look fancy-funny-with-a-so-cuty-vintage-camera. Nevertheless, I can imagine that there is more place for experiment in wedding photography cause it's more related to a creation-arty-world.

(2) On the other hand, there's the great amateur, "expert" or however you call him. He enjoys a lot photography, he loves it and enjoys hearing "hey, here comes the professional" when he meets his friends. He wants to look like a pro in a discreet way. He likes how a big black dusky camera looks. It is just like his friends pop-up-f/5.6-lens-kitted-camera but bigger. And he likes that. Different but not so much. He's really involved in photography. Seriously.He usually shoots great pictures, is happy with his gear and he just wonders if the next camera will be that great in ISO to change his actual one or if it is really a good idea to buy another bizarre-prime.

(3) On another hand, there's the regular guy. He likes taking pictures. He know some stuff like ISO's (he remembers that he used to buy 400 ones ten years ago) and shoots his family smiling, his friends and the great landscapes he sees when traveling or going in the land on sunday to have a lunch with the in-laws. He usually shoots "P-mode".He's related to the guys who likes the "photography" and is in a more "arty-approach" but doesn't involves that much. He shoots some good pics, have a "his-name-photography" facebook fan page and loves when people tells him that he should become a pro because his "sunset is amazing". He wants very sharp pictures even though he doesn't really get why some pics are and some aren't.

(4) And then there's everyone else. People only wanting to get souvenirs of events, who doesn't care at all about IQ. Their phone is the perfect tool cause pics are shared at the same time with all their friends, mates and family. That's the only thing they care about. There is also the kind people buying a 100D or 450D because "having a DSLR is so cool" which is quite the same. They shoot the green-box-mode.

I'm not saying that one are better than the other. I just note what come through my mind while writing this post. There is obviously a lot of different kinds of photographers, different way of seriously enjoying photography, of making a living of it.... But i consider that these are the biggest and most general "categories".

I think that people who could be interested in a serious-and-retro-super-cool-looking cameras are the third category of people. But they don't have 3000€ to spend for that. That's why i consider that it is overpriced a lot. I think that people buying 3000€ cameras will buy it whatever it looks. It they like how it looks, it's a good point but not a decisive argument. They may hesitate between the 2200€ and the 5000€ one but they are wondering if they really need the 61-points-AF or the 14fps ability, not which one is the best looking.

Well. When I had it in my hands, ive enjoyed it. All the wheels are not so bad to deal with, you just have to get used. I d'ont think it is that bad, really not : unlike what the teasers shows, it is fast and easy to change the speed via a wheel. The AF (on a 28 1.8, the new 50mm was not available) seemed to be quite fast and accurate. There was no memory card so i was unable to really appreciate the high-iso-IQ. I was more interested in the UI and i've been satisfied although i found it to appear a bit "cheap". It ain't solid metal like an old NikonFM...I won't spend 3000€ for the DF, never. It would have been 1000€, yeah, why not, I've a dozens of old (and really old) Nikkor. It would have been a digital-manual-focus-camera, juste like my Leicas. But it's not for me....and I don't really get why people would actually buy it if it ain't that better than the D610.